With compelling exculpatory evidence on the horizon, the journalists here at HartfordCommunityCourt.com would like to present our readers with a document that provokes a question in which the Hartford Judicial District must now answer. According to official documents, recently secured on 10/26/2015, by our Field Operations Manager, Gerald Kory, it appears that the State’s Attorney’s Office has illegally obtained evidence in regard to the case of the State of Connecticut vs. Jonathan Reich, rendering such evidence inadmissible in court, and “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree.” This case needs to be dismissed immediately and the corrupt State Representatives need to be held accountable for their felonious activities.

With attention given to the Connecticut General Statutes and felony evidence tampering that has already taken place in this case, the Connecticut State Judicial Branch Practice Book assures that defendant’s rights to evidence and police reports should be upheld without corruption and other illegal countermeasures. Several police reports and other items of exculpatory evidence have been denied to three different defense attorneys for almost three years, allowing a simple Community Court offense to persist for over two years. In violation of the eighth amendment, these activities have subjected the defendant to excessive legal fees, bail, and illegal court procedures. This series of actions is incredibly sickening due to the fact that the Hartford Community Court readily and frequently makes deals with defendants within thirty days after completion of community service. Let this be a signal that this is an extraordinary case with extraordinary confines. It seems that when the prosecuting authority cannot produce key pieces of evidence against a “suspect,” one should question how a prosecution is even possible, given that evidence against the suspect is actually evidence against the state of Connecticut.

In jurisprudence, prosecutorial misconduct is “an illegal act or failing to act, on the part of a prosecutor, especially an attempt to sway the jury to wrongly convict a defendant or to impose a harsher than appropriate punishment.” Prosecutorial misconduct is a specifically difficult problem to deal with in Connecticut due to the fact that the State’s Attorney’s Office operates in secret.

Are we in America? Or has Connecticut secretly adopted legal procedures from the Russian Federation?

While seeming off-topic, this seems to be primarily involving the Hartford Community Court. Perhaps this is why there are so many trips to Russia made by Judge Norko and his affiliates.

Dmitry Matveyev, Deputy Head of the Pskov Law Institute of the Federal Penal Service of Russian Federation.

Roman Nickolayev, Lecturer at the Dept. of Criminal and Penal Law of the Pskov Law Institute of the Federal Penal Service of Russian Federation.

Vladimir Lavrentyev, Lecturer at the Dept. of Criminal and Penal Law of the Pskov Law Institute of the Federal Penal Service of Russian Federation.

Olga Balashova, Criminal Defense Attorney, Pskov.

Tatiana Gaidalenko, Criminal Defense Attorney, Velikiye Luki.

We would like to invite Assistant State’s Attorney Thomas J. O’Brien, and his supervisor Carl Ajello of the Hartford State’s Attorney’s Office, to explain multiple mockeries of the Connecticut Judicial System, including: felonious court document tampering, civil rights violations, religious persecution, cruel and unusual punishment, and withholding exculpatory evidence under the authority of the Hartford State’s Attorney’s Office. The charges against the Defendant Jonathan Reich are baseless and politically motivated, to which it seems illegal measures were used in order to obtain evidentiary information in order to prosecute his case.